Re: Fixing row comparison semantics

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Fixing row comparison semantics
Date: 2005-12-24 14:38:23
Message-ID: 14823.1135435103@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org> writes:
> One thing my COLLATE patch does is distinguish between collations and
> operator classes. So the reverse operator class issue disappears
> because it's just a collation and doesn't need a operator class
> (although it won't break anything, see below).

Are you suggesting that COLLATE will impose comparison semantics on
all datatypes including non-string types? If so, I'd be interested
to know what you have in mind. If not, claiming that it makes the
issue go away is nonsensical.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-12-24 14:45:30 Re: Fixing row comparison semantics
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2005-12-24 14:18:17 Re: [Bizgres-general] WAL bypass for INSERT, UPDATE and